It's a shame you feel that way, and that you can't really engage without resorting to things like that.

Just like if you were trying to talk shit on Robocop, I'm not gonna let you do that either. I'm not gonna blow smoke up your ass and agree with you that this is a sad situation that couldn't have been avoided. Sometimes the truth hurts.

I can't recall a specific instance where Dan criticized the song selection for a scene in a movie as being completely wrong. But imagine that he did, or imagine how he would do that. Like if there was a really lighthearted song playing during a very serious scene. That's all it is....it's just the wrong song for the scene.

If you're sad man, I get it. And I'm not saying don't be sad. But it's not unavoidable, it's not something that was bound to happen no matter what. Unlike the separation between the singer and Tuesday was unavoidable due to something specific about her nature.

This is a tactic that I've seen used very effectively lately on twitch, and I think I'm going to give it a try in the coming war. Simply put, it's a pretty standard gowiwi (although I bet gowipe would work), but once the troops hit the center and are getting attacked by the defenses opposite from the side the attack originated, 10-12 hogs are released to take out those defenses. If the defenses are already occupied by your main force, the hogs seem to be able to drop about 5 of them, which in turn preserves your main force. Anyway, I'm giving it a whirl this war, and I wanted to share it, and the clever name I came up with.

My father used to say that not playing to win is like sleeping with your sister. Sure she's a great piece of tail, with a blouse full of goodies, but... it's just illegal. Then you get into that whole inbred thing. Kids with no teeth who do nothing but play the banjo... eat apple sauce through a straw... pork farm animals.

Here's the thing. I don't think anyone could argue I'm not one of the people the most on the "focus on war" thing, and my thoughts on this kind of move are that we would need to consider this very carefully. One of my prior clans, one that I stayed with for over a year and was the reluctant leader for almost half that time made a similar move and it killed the clan. That being said, plenty of clans do similar things and it works out fine. Ultimately in this case it seems like the non-war clan might sink because the people who are less war oriented won't stick with the game as long. I think this should be considered further.
The other thing is that we're not at capacity at this point, and if we cleared out people who were inactive, we'd have even more space.
All that being said, I think the dedicated war clan would probably do well, as we would certainly have motivated leadership and the people in it would be focused. However, I wonder how hard it might be to maintain our identity. It's all something to consider.

Personally, I think people who miss an attack should sit out the next war regardless. It's the only recourse we have considering we don't kick people for non-participation like 99% of clans. I'm perfectly okay with us being different in this regard, but we need to be always benching people who miss an attack. Missing both attacks should cause them to be benched for both wars. Maybe if they come on to chat and explain themselves and say it won't happen the next war, we give them a pass, but if they then turn around and miss again they should be double benched.
If we still have an off number after eliminating all those people, the first thing we should do is throw it out to the chat. It seems like there will always be somebody that is willing to sit of the option is floated out there. Ultimately I think it would be great to have an overall list of everyone with their overall total number of missed attacks, and we could bench people based on that, but that might come off as a bit fascist to some people. 😀

Only issue I see is that there is really only time for three wars in a week. Each war is 2 days, so even with 3 wars per week we only have 24 hours extra, which works out to approximately 8 hours between wars, which it definitely seems like we need.
Of course, I may be doing my math wrong. Operating on very little sleep...

Keep in mind this list is sloppy as hell and may not reflect anything approaching useful information. All it is is me going through past 3 star attacks and looking at how much loot was the reward. Keep in mind that your number might be higher, especially if you dipped low, and that the type of attack used and the enemy base layout are huge factors. So basicly, this information is in no way useful at all.

It's really only on people doing Friday wars, since that's all I've had time for and the whole process is experimental

I think we've got a real shot...
So clan castles- it looks like their top guy could run a decent Gowipe, the rest, well... Not so much. I think the TH 8's should be anti dragon as usual, make sure we donate level 3 drags.

As for the rest, witches make me nervous with the new poison spell. What do people think about pekkas as an alternative? Any and all ideas, people.

I didn't see very many attacks from our most recent war. Is this a tactic the other clans are picking up on? There seems to be no downside to bringing a poison spell along, and I've definitely been throwing them at cc troops. Regardless, we should proceed as if this clan we are facing is hip to this strategy, and proceed accordingly. Dragons seem like a better choice for the TH 8's since they'll likely be facing exclusively air attacks, so pekkas would be about the same effectiveness of damage soaking without being able to fight back. Once I get confirmation, I'll continue throwing drags in. Maybe with 5 archers wen there is room to delay the fiery reveal for a moment...

Alright! Just tested the theory. I donated a level 3 dragon to Rachel, and it transformed into a level 4. This is going to be sweet.
I should also mention I don't mind at all doing the majority of donations this war if it will get us better upgraded troops, as long as whoever has access to level 1 witches can assist with those, as they will be maxed out upon donation and therefor just as good as what I could donate.

Who we actually attack should be determined based on the loot level of our opponents and what we know we can 3 star. Hopefully by now most of us are getting a clear idea of what range we can three star. I've been collecting some data on this but I have a bit more to tabulate. This is NOT a war where we automatically attack our equal, we want to get those 3-star attacks on the board.

I think we're a bit late getting going on this but we've got tons of time. Typically, we put a witch in the upper level castles with wizards and archers, as these bases will typically be facing gowipe. Below that we go anti air, with wizards and archers.
I've got level 6 archers and level 5 wizards so that's generally the minimum, but we sometimes open up to lower levels if we run out of room to donate at that level.

Once the war begins, hold off on your attacks at first so I can see the map. I've looked at the info from the last two wars so I'm starting to get a general idea about the range that everyone here can three star. There probably won't be much of a change, if any to the plan, but let me take a look first and make sure.

Xero, I'm worried they might change their bases as we near the start. In particular, one of their 9-10 has an exposed AD. If that stays exposed, I think it gives Rachel a great chance to 3*. If it switches, we might want to think harder about how to proceed.

That's always a possibility. We have 24 hours though, so once we hit war time, we should take a deep breath and evaluate. Really the prep time prior to war is at best a time to get our own shit in order.

We should also consider doing different kinds of groups in the coming weeks. I've been having this nagging feeling in my head that a war witt just our town hall 8's might have a serious shot at not only pulling a good opponent, but also wiping the floor with them.

I'm just gonna float this out there. Haven't given it much thought, more of an observation. If we exclude Brandon and [5ig], we have exactly ten co-leaders/elders that are currently opted in. It might not be ideal to base the Wednesday lineup on rank, but maybe it should be something we strive for.

The people who didn't use both attacks are as follows:
Sircattree
[5ig]
Mullman18
Oz
Trilla

As mentioned, there are sometimes instances in which the lower level players will have nobody to attack. A further complication is sometimes we throw in the towel when there is no possibility of victory. So this list may not be useful by itself.

I suppose my biggest fear is people getting upset for not being included. For that reason, maybe it would make more sense to start with a really small group, and build it up as people express interest or otherwise prove themselves in war.